My organization just hit a use case where we need MS-SQL support. I am jumping on board, so there are at least two of us who can do maintenance.
I must say that I would prefer quasi-supported status (akin to admin and geodjango) rather than actually being in the core. I think it would be a better fit for most situations. We will always be a small minority of django users. I would just like some assurance that pull requests needed to provide good hook support for external database backends got prompt attention from the core developers. -- Vernon Cole On Thursday, March 7, 2013 6:46:18 PM UTC+1, Jacob Kaplan-Moss wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 3:22 AM, Marc Tamlyn <[email protected]<javascript:>> > wrote: > > I don't know why Oracle is included and MSSQL is not [...] > > It's essentially because a group of people made a concerted effort to > get the Oracle backend up to snuff (around the 1.0 timeline, I think?) > and then committed to maintaining it. Lately the original people who'd > made that commitment have dropped off a bit, but there's always been > enough attention to keep it up to date. > > If someone -- preferably a group -- stepped up and committed to > keeping a MSSQL backend up-to-date in core, I'd be +1 on merging it > and giving those people commit access to keep it up to date. > > [This is me speaking personally, not as a BDFL. It'd have to be a > discussion, not just my fiat.] > > Jacob > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
